Coach’sPaper

Original replacement and team performance DOI: https://doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2021.101600

Impact of elite soccer coaching change on team performance

according to coach- and club-related variables
AUTHORS: Miguel A. Gómez1,2, Carlos Lago-Peñas3, María-Teresa Gómez2, Sergio Jimenez4, Corresponding author:
Anthony S. Leicht2 Miguel-Ángel Gómez-Ruano
ORCID: https://orcid.
org/0000-0002-9585-3158
1
Faculty of Physical Activity and Sport Sciences, Technical University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain Department of Social Sciences
2 Physical Activity, Sport
Sport and Exercise Science, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia
3 and Leisure
Faculty of Education and Sports Sciences, University of Vigo, Pontevedra, Spain Universidad Politécnica de
4
Centre for Sport Studies, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Spain Madrid (UPM),
C/Martín Fierro, 7
CP/28040, Madrid, Spain
ABSTRACT: A coaching change is an extreme, but frequently occurring phenomenon in elite soccer with its Email: miguelangel.gomez.
impact on team success debatable. The aim of the current study was twofold: (i) to compare team’s performance ruano@upm.es
when coached by new and old coaches; and (ii) to investigate the impact of a coaching change on team’s
performance according to coach- and club-related factors. All in-season coaching changes from the 2010–11
to 2017–18 seasons within the Spanish, French, English, German and Italian professional leagues were examined.
Team performance was assessed as points awarded from match outcome over 1–20  matches prior to and
following the coaching change. Four independent variables (coach’s experience, team’s budget, whether the
coach had been an elite former player or not, and whether the coach was a  novice or not) were included into
linear regression modelling. The main results showed that team’s short-term performance was improved
significantly with a  change to a  new coach with this impact declining in the longer term (>  10  matches).
Specifically, the number of points (1.15–1.32 vs. 0.37–1.03, p  <  0.05) and the moving average of points
(1.19–1.31 vs. 0.37–1.04, p < 0.05) awarded per match were significantly greater after the coaching change.
Further, the winning effect due to the new coach was independent of coach-related factors such as coaching
experience or the new coach being a former elite player. A critical organisational decision to change coaches
may provide an essential stimulus for future team success in elite soccer.
Key words:
Football
CITATION: Gómez MA, Lago-Peñas C, Gómez MT et al. Impact of elite soccer coaching change on team
Managers
performance according to coach- and club-related variables. Biol Sport. 2021;38(4):603–608. Replacement
Team success
Received: 2020-07-24; Reviewed: 2020-11-07; Re-submitted: 2020-11-11; Accepted: 2020-11-24; Published: 2021-01-14. Regression modelling

INTRODUCTION
Professional soccer coaches play a key role in leading and managing
teams at the individual and club levels [1]. However, professional
coaches are required to deal with several issues that may affect the
team’s performance over the season such as player injuries, con-
gested match fixtures, player recruitment, daily practice, media or the
unpredictability of environmental-related factors during soccer match-
es [2]. At the elite level, the assessment of a coach’s ability in soccer
is mainly based on win-loss records within national and international
competitions with poor success leading to a coaching change at any
stage of the season (e.g. starting, mid-season, or final rounds) [2–3].
Therefore, coaching staff experience significant pressure in their role
due to the multifactorial nature of team’s performances including
match outcomes and competition ranking (via accumulated points)
during the season [4]. These factors directly impact the coach and
team with those coaches not meeting organisational expectations
fired, even during the season [5]. However, such a change in coach
may have a negative influence on team’s performance [4, 6] that
questions its appropriateness during a season.
To date, several theories have been proposed to substantiate the
effect of a coaching change [7–8]. Firstly, the common-sense theo-
ry proposed that a coaching change would disrupt the current nega-
tive trend with improvements in subsequent performances via in-
vigorated players and fan base [8]. Secondly, the vicious-circle
theory proposed that a coaching change would affect the internal
club/team relationships and improve subsequent declining perfor-
mance [8]. Next, the ritual scapegoat theory proposed that firing
a coach would decrease stakeholders’ frustration with the team’s
poor performance and subsequent performances perceived to be
better [8]. In addition, the slump ending effect [7] has been clearly
observed for improved team performance using a natural trend (i.e.
regression to the mean) after the coach was replaced [9–12].
While these theories have been proposed for the improvement
following the replacement of a coach, others have failed to identify
better performances after the replacement [13] with some even report-
ing that teams performed worse [14]. To date, a few studies have
specifically examined the impact of a coach replacement on team

Biology of Sport, Vol. 38 No4, 2021 603


performance [5, 15]. Lago-Peñas [5] reported that coach turnover
had a short-term effect followed by a continued decreased performance
over the subsequent 10, 15 and 20 matches during the 1997–98 to
2006–2007 seasons of the Spanish professional soccer league.
Kattuman et al. [15] followed the performance of a single team
(European professional soccer) across two coaches (i.e. old and new
coach). These authors reported a significant and short-term improve-
ment in goal difference per match, and positive result after the coach-
ing change, but no change thereafter in the trajectory of the team’s
ranking within the league [15]. Additionally, these authors reported
positive changes in management/teams behaviour and team’s affec-
tive tone following the new coach’s start [15]. Interestingly, despite
this positive behavioural effect, match tactics (e.g. passing network
and accuracy) and players’ movement (e.g. distance run and sprint-
ed) during matches were unchanged after the coaching change [15].
Collectively, these recent studies have shown positive and nega-
tive effects with a coaching change with relevant variables possibly
not considered that may have masked or affected the analyses. In
particular, the influence of coach-related (i.e. coach’s coaching and
former playing experience) [2], and club-related factors (i.e., financial
budget) has not been examined in regards to team’s performances
(points won) during short, mid and long-term periods (e.g. 1 to 20
competition rounds) following a coaching change. Therefore, the aim
of the current study was twofold: (i) to compare team’s performance
when coached by new and old coaches; and (ii) to investigate the
impact of a coaching change on team’s performance according to
coach- and club-related factors over 20 matches. It was hypothesised
that a coaching replacement would have a short-term impact on
team’s performance with this decreasing as the season progressed.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Sample
All mid-season coaching changes (n = 411) from the 2010–11
season to the 20017–18 season in the Spanish La Liga (n = 85),
French Ligue 1 (n = 51), English Premier League (n = 79), German
Bundesliga (n = 82) and Italian Serie A (n = 109) were collected.
These leagues represented the five major European Championships
and consisted of 18 (Bundesliga) or 20 teams (English FA Premier
League, Ligue 1, La Liga and Serie A) that played 34 or 38 match-
es, respectively, each season. All teams played a balanced home and
away schedule. Each coaching change was considered as a single
case with at least one match with each coach (i.e. old and new
coach). The coaching changes that involved less than 20 matches
were less than 5% of total cases (n = 17) (i.e. Spanish La Liga
n = 7, French Ligue 1 n = 0, English Premier League n = 3, Ger-
man Bundesliga n = 4, and Italian Serie A n = 3) and were analysed
accordingly (see below) without biasing the model. In addition, only
n = 8 cases involved the same club during the same season (i.e.
Spanish La Liga n = 1, French Ligue 1 n = 1, English Premier League
n = 1, German Bundesliga n = 2, and Italian Serie A n = 3). The
number of points awarded to teams in matches prior to and following
604
Miguel A. Gómez et al.
a coaching change were obtained from different public, open access
databases. The annual budget of the clubs was collected by consult-
ing the Deloitte and Touche Annual Reports (http://www.deloitte.
com). Finally, other measures such as the experience and expertise
of coaches were retrieved from the open access web domain https://
www.transfermarkt.co.uk.
Procedure
The performance measure was the number of points awarded to
teams in the 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 15 or 20 matches prior to and fol-
lowing the coaching change. For each match, teams were awarded
3 points for a win, 1 point for a draw and 0 points for a loss. The
advantages of these measures were twofold. Firstly, a performance
measure that declined when performance stagnated was obtained.
Second, abrupt performance declines or increases were smoothed
out. Further, several moments across the season were selected to
examine how team performance changed.
Statistical Analysis
First, data normality assumptions were tested using the Kolmogorov-
Smirnov test while descriptive results were presented using mean
and standard deviation. Secondly, the autocorrelation function (ACF)
was used with a lag of 7 (7 match intervals: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 15
and 20) to test the persistency of points awarded per match for each
coach. Thirdly, comparisons among repeated measures for each coach
(old and new) were analysed via paired t-tests with the level of sig-
nificance set at p < 0.05.
Linear regression analyses were estimated to determine the winning
profile of a new coach. As indicated previously, the dependent variable
was the points awarded over 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 15 or 20 matches
following the coaching change (performance). When interpreting the
statistical results, positive or negative coefficients indicated a greater
or lower propensity to improve team’s performance, respectively. Four
independent variables were included in the models. The first variable
was the number of months as a head coach within the first division
of any league (experience). The second variable was the ranking of
each team in accordance with the annual budget with 1 being the
highest annual budget and 18 or 20 being the lowest, pending num-
ber of teams in competition (budget). The third variable analysed was
whether the coach had been a former elite player or not and was
coded as a dichotomous variable: 1 = former player; 0 = not former
player (former player). Finally, the fourth variable identified whether
the observed coach was a novice coach or not within the league
competition and was coded as a dichotomous variable: 1 = the ob-
served coach had experience in the league competition; 0 = the ob-
served coach was a novice in the league competition (novice).
The developed models were as follows where β1 was the intercept
and ε1 was the disturbance term:
PERFORMANCE = β1 + β2 EXPERIENCE + β3 BUDGET
+ β4 FORMER PLAYER + β5 NOVICE + ε1
 Coach’s replacement and team performance

RESULTS
Descriptive results for points awarded to teams with each coach (i.e.
points per match and moving average of points per match) are pre-
sented in Table 1. The moving average of points awarded per match
was significantly greater for the new compared to the old coach for
all matches studied (Table 1). In addition, the points awarded per
match were significantly greater for the new compared to the old
coach for all matches studied except during 15 (old = new) and 20
(old > new) matches (Table 1). No significant autocorrelations
(p > 0.05) for old and new coaches were identified for points award-
ed or the moving average of points awarded per match (Table 2).
Table 2 shows the influence of the independent variables on the
number of points awarded to teams during 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 15 or
20 matches following the coaching change. The variable budget had
a significant effect on points awarded with teams possessing a low-
er annual budget awarded less points (Table 2). The variables expe-
rience, former player and novice did not have any influence on the
number of points awarded to teams (Table 2).
DISCUSSION
In this study the effects of a coaching change or leadership succes-
sion on team performance was examined. The current study dem-
onstrated that: (i) team’s short-term performance was improved
significantly with a change to a new coach with this impact declining
in the longer term (> 10 matches); and (ii) the winning effect due
to the new coach was not dependent upon coach-related factors such
as coaching experience or the new coach being a former elite player.
A critical organisational decision to change coaches may provide the
essential stimulus for future team success in elite soccer.
A coaching change is an extreme, but frequently occurring phe-
nomenon in elite soccer. For example, there were 55 coaching
changes within the `Big Five` European Soccer Leagues during the
2017/18 season. Despite this potential large number of annual coach-
ing changes, studies to date have provided inconclusive results about
the relationship between in-season coaching changes and team’s
performance. For example, teams tended to experience positive results
in their first matches with a new coach in the top three divisions of

TABLE 1. Descriptive results for points awarded per match and the moving average of points awarded per match for the old and new
coach (ACF: autocorrelation function and standard error).
Old coach New coach t-test
M SD M SD t p
Points awarded per match
1 match 0.37 0.85 1.27 1.27 -12.13 .001**
2 matches 0.64 1.02 1.32 1.38 7.80 .001**
3 matches 0.92 1.19 1.23 1.27 3.83 .001**
4 matches 0.86 1.15 1.42 1.31 6.46 .001**
5 matches 0.90 1.15 1.31 2.02 -3.46 .001**
10 matches 1.03 0.60 1.15 0.76 -2.54 .012*
15 matches 1.13 0.60 1.15 0.72 -0.37 .710
20 matches 1.24 0.66 1.14 0.71 2.26 .024*
ACF 0.38 (0.29) 0.29 (0.30) 0.20/0.33
Moving average of points awarded
1 match 0.37 0.85 1.27 1.27 -12.13 .001**
2 matches 0.51 0.69 1.30 0.91 -15.01 .001**
3 matches 0.64 0.65 1.27 0.78 -14.30 .001**
4 matches 0.70 0.57 1.31 0.74 -14.77 .001**
5 matches 0.74 0.53 1.31 0.75 -13.92 .001**
10 matches 0.89 0.45 1.23 0.59 -11.19 .001**
15 matches 0.97 0.41 1.20 0.57 -8.48 .001**
20 matches 1.04 0.39 1.19 0.56 -5.93 .001**
ACF 0.54 (0.29) 0.53 (0.29) 0.06/0.07

*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01

Biology of Sport, Vol. 38 No4, 2021 605

 Miguel A. Gómez et al.

TABLE 2. The impact of coaching change on team performance.

Dependent variable: Points per match awarded to teams (0–3 points per match)
Independent Variables
Match 1 Match 2 Match 3 Match 4 Match 5 Match 10 Match 15 Match 20
a
experience -0.01 (0.01) -0.01 (0.01) -0.01 (0.01) -0.01 (0.01) -0.01 (0.01) -0.01 (0.01) 0.01 (0.01) 0.01 (0.01)
-0.07* -0.06* -0.06* -0.06* -0.05* -0.05* -0.05* -0.06*
budgeta
(0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01)
former Playera 0.05 (0.13) 0.01 (0.09) -0.04 (0.08) -0.07 (0.08) -0.08 (0.07) -0.07 (0.06) -0.03 (0.06) -0.06 (0.06)
a
novice 0.06 (0.14) -0.01 (0.11) 0.01 (0.08) -0.03 (0.08) -0.11 (0.10) -0.03 (0.06) -0.01 (0.06) -0.02 (0.05)
Constant 1.99 (0.19)* 1.99 (0.14)* 2.04 (0.11)* 2.05 (0.10)* 2.01 (0.11)* 1.87 (0.09)* 1.79 (0.09)* 1.84 (0.09)*
R2 0.08 0.11 0.17 0.16 0.14 0.24 0.24 0.17
Observations 409 386 386 386 386 386 386 386
a
Values are Beta coefficients (standard error) from the linear regression analyses.

the Belgium league [16] and the Spanish La Liga [5]. In contrast,
coaching changes have either had no, or a slightly negative effect on
team’s performance in the Italian Serie A [17] and the Dutch Premier
League [18]. Within English professional soccer, coaching changes
resulted in poorer team performance [16]. Therefore, a clearer un-
derstanding of the benefits and/or disadvantages of in-season coach-
ing changes is needed to support elite soccer organisations. The
current study has extended our knowledge and confirmed that an
in-season coaching change can be beneficial to team success. This
outcome was a result of several strengths of the current study com-
pared with previous studies including that: (i) the sample size was
very large and included > 400 coaching changes from five different
competitions; (ii) the statistical analyses included temporal analyses
of ACF and the moving average of points awarded per match, improv-
ing the power of the current findings; and (iii) how club- (i.e. budget)
and coach-related (i.e. past and present coaching experience, wheth-
er a coach was a former elite player or not) factors affected team’s
performance. The current findings provide a methodical and mean-
ingful effect of coaching changes on elite soccer team’s performance.
High performance soccer coaches play a crucial role in the coach-
athlete performance relationship [1]. Coaches often face challenges
and constraints that influence their daily practice and the competitive
outcome [2]. Nevertheless, high performance soccer coach’s ability
and reputation are based upon match wins and losses, with poor
win-loss ratios potentially leading to coaching changes by organisa-
tions or clubs [3]. A club’s decision to change coaches can be driv-
en by many factors however, the most common reason reported has
been to induce a shock-effect where a new coach motivates players
better for improved results [15]. Potentially, the employment of a new
coach produces novel and positive relationships, and less negative
emotions and stress, during trainings and matches that motivate
players and staff for success [15]. Therefore, changes in player’s
psychological and motivational behaviours may be a favourable short-
term result after a coaching change [19–22].
Conventional wisdom suggests that it takes time for new coaches
to accumulate organization-specific knowledge for success [9–10].
Balduck and Buelens [23] argued that a period of approximately one
month (i.e. 4–5 matches) might be too short for new coaches to
renovate the team for success. Further, they suggested that evalua-
tions of coaching ability and team performance beyond 6–7 match-
es after a coaching change were more worthwhile [23]. Our results
demonstrated that the beneficial effects of a coaching change in elite
soccer lasted at least 10 matches but was absent at 15–20 match-
es. In fact, team performance, via the number of points awarded,
during the old coach’s tenure was higher than that for the new coach
at 20 matches after the coaching change. This lack of long-term
effect may be related to other factors such as changes in the number
of muscular injuries experienced by the team [24]. The frequency of
muscle injuries was reported to be 2.3 times higher in the two weeks,
and 1.9 times higher at one month, after the arrival of a new
coach [24]. Therefore, the innate ability of the coach to lead the
team for the long-term appears to be vital once the initial psycho-
logical effects of a coaching change disappears.
The employment of coaches in professional sports is complex and
dynamic with several factors, other than winning, potentially con-
tributing to maintaining or dismissing a coach [2]. Often, the opinions
of club management and owners, as well as corporate sponsor ex-
pectations, contribute to coaching employment decisions [25]. In
the current study, annual budget was the only club- or team-related
variable associated with team performance. This result supported
prior work which showed that resources were a key contributor to
team success [24] [25], and possibly greater than that of a coach’s
playing and/or coaching experience [2]. In the current study, team
success was not affected by prior coaching experience, including

606
 Coach’s replacement and team performance

being a novice coach, or whether the new coach was a former elite
player. Consequently, it seemed that the impact of the new coach
was dependent more on the change itself rather than on the charac-
teristics of the new coach.
The current study has important practical applications for coach-
es, players and club management. For a team experiencing a run of
poor results, changing the coach may provide a crucial stimulus to
break the sequence and improve team success, particularly in the
short-term (~10 matches). This organisational option may be ad-
vantageous towards the end of the competitive season where success
could lead to winning a league championship. In fact, many teams
may be inadvertently supporting this advice with coach turnover
higher at the end of the seasons in multiple European professional
football soccer leagues such as the Belgium Jupiter League [25],
English Premier League [26], German Bundesliga [27], Italian Se-
rie A [17], Dutch Eredivise [28], and Spanish La Liga [5]. However,
clubs should take into account that the coach’s prior coaching and/
or playing experience may be of little relevance to near-term success.
To our knowledge, this study has been the first to examine the
effects of a coaching change on team performance accounting for
coach- and club-related factors. While novel, some limitations of this
study should be acknowledged. Firstly, this study did not consider
match-statistics as a measure of team performance or player motiva-
tion to perform prior to and after the coaching change. Secondly, the
study did not examine or account for when the coaching change
occurred (i.e. stage of season). Thirdly, the exact driver/s for a coach-
ing change were not determined including possible revolutionary
organisational changes at the executive and/or team roster levels.
Fourthly, the current study examined coaching changes over one
season with future research encouraged to consider the temporal
impact (i.e. previous two or more seasons of the dismissed coach)
in order to compare the long-term, team performance evolution.
Lastly, the margin of victory (i.e. goal difference) was not considered
in the analyses, which may have an effect on team’s performances
during the season [29], regardless of a coaching change. Thus, future
research should consider goal-difference as a covariate to assess the
impact of a coaching change on team performance such as points
won [29]. The above factors may have an important influence on
the relationship between coaching changes and team performance
with future research encouraged to incorporate these aspects.
In conclusion, the current study demonstrated that the significant
organisational decision for a coaching change had a positive impact
on team’s performance over time. Specifically, the number of points
and the moving average of points awarded per match in the short
term (< 11 matches) were significantly greater after the coaching
change. Previous competition or league experience as a head coach,
the number of years as head coach, or to have been a former player
did not improve team success following employment of a new coach.
Organisational decisions to change coaches may ultimately lead to
short-term success in elite soccer.
Acknowledgements
The authors Miguel-Ángel Gómez and Carlos Lago were supported
by the Ministerio de economía, industria y competitividad (DEP2017-
90641-REDT), The Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport of Spain
supported the corresponding author, under the mobility Grant “Sal-
vador de Madariaga” (PRX18/00098) in cooperation with James
Cook University (Townsville, Australia).
Conflict of interest declaration
No conflict of interest were reported by the authors.

REFERENCES
1. Lyle J. Sports coaching concepts:
A framework for coaches’ behaviour.
London: Routledge; 2002.
2. Tozetto AB, Carvalho HM, Rosa RS,
Mendes FG, Silva WR, Nascimento JV,
Milistetd M. Coach Turnover in Top
Professional Brazilian Football
Championship: A Multilevel Survival
Analysis. Front Psychol. 2019;10:1246.
3. Duffy P, Hartley H, Bales J, Crespo M,
Dick F, Vardhan D. Sport coaching as
a “profession”: challenges and future
directions. Int J Coach Sci. 2011;
5: 93–123.
4. Mallett C J, Lara-Bercial S. (2016).
Serial winning coaches: people, vision,
and environment.. In: Raab M,
Wylleman P, Seiler R, Elbe A,
Hatzigeorgiadis A. Sport and exercise
psychology research: From theory to
practice Amsterdam, The Netherlands:
Elsevier; 2016. p. 289–322.
5. Lago-Peñas C. Coach mid-season
replacement and team performance in
professional soccer. J Hum Kinet. 2011;
28:115–122.
6. Mallett C, Rynne S. Changing role of
coaches across development. In
Damian JFB. Routledge handbook of
sport expertise. Abingdon: Routledge;
2015 p. 394–403.
7. Gamson WA, Scotch NA. Scapegoating in
baseball. Am J Sociol. 1964;70:69–72.
8. Kesner IF, Sebora TC. Executive
succession: Past, present & future.
J Manage. 1994;20(2):327–372.
9. Salomo S. Teichmann K. The relationship
of performance and managerial
succession in the German Premier
Football League. Eur J Sport Manage.
2000;7:99–119.
10. Audas R, Dobson S, Goddard J. The
impact of managerial change on team
performance in professional sports.
J Econ Bus. 2002;54(6):633–650.
11. Nevill A, Holder R, Atkinson G, Copas J.
The dangers of reporting spurious
regression to the mean. J Sport Sci.
2004;22(9):800–802.
12. Rowe WG, Cannella Jr AA, Rankin D,
Gorman D. Leader succession and
organizational performance: Integrating
the common-sense, ritual
scapegoating, and vicious-circle
succession theories. The Leadership
Q. 2005;16(2):197–219.
13. Eitzen DS, Yetman NR. Managerial
change, longevity, and organizational
effectiveness. Administrative Sci
Q. 1972;110–116.
14. Audas R, Dobson S, Goddard J. Team
performance and managerial change in
the English Football League. Econ Affairs.
1997; 7(3):30–36.
15. Kattuman P, Loch C, Kurchian C.
Management succession and success in
a professional soccer team. PloS One.
2019;14(3):0212634.
16. Balduck AL, Buelens M, Philippaerts R.

Biology of Sport, Vol. 38 No4, 2021 607


Short-term effects of midseason coach
turnover on team performance in soccer.
Res Q Exercise Sport. 2010;
81:379–383.
17. Paola MD, Scoppa V. The effects of
managerial turnover: evidence from coach
dismissals in Italian soccer teams. J.
Sport Econ. 2012; 13:152–168.
18. Koning RH. An econometric evaluation
of the effect of firing a coach on team
performance. App Econ. 2003;35(5):
555–564.
19. Bennet G, Phillips J, Drane D, Sagas M.
The coaching carousel: Turnover effects
on winning in professional sport. Int
J Sport Manage. 2003;4(3):194–204.
20. Fabianic D. Managerial change and
organizational effectiveness in Major
League Baseball: findings for the eighties.
J Sport Behav. 1994;17(3):135.
21. McTeer W, White PG. Manager/coach
mid-season replacement and team
performance in professional team sport.
J Sport Behav. 1995;18:58–69.
608
22. Pfeffer J, Davis-Blake A. Administrative
succession and organizational
performance: How administrator
experience mediates the succession
effect. Acad Manage J. 1986;
29(1):72–83.
23. Balduck AL, Buelens M. Does Sacking
the Coach Help Or Hinder the Team in
the Short Term?: Evidence from Belgian
Soccer. Faculteit Economie en
Bedrijfskunde, Univ. Gent; 2007.
24. Dönmez G, Kudaş S, Yörübulut M,
Yıldırım M, Babayeva N, Torgutalp ŞŞ.
Evaluation of Muscle Injuries in
Professional Football Players: Does Coach
Replacement Affect the Injury Rate?. Clin
J Sport Med. 2018;5:1–6.
25. Wangrow DB, Schepker DJ, Barker VL.
Power, performance, and expectations in
the dismissal of NBA coaches: a survival
analysis study. Sport Manage Rev. 2018;
21:333–346.
26. Bachan R, Reilly B, Witt R. The hazard of
being an English football league manager:
Miguel A. Gómez et al.
empirical estimates for three recent
league seasons. J Oper Res Sociol. 2008;
59:884–891.
27. Barros CP, Frick B, Passos J. Coaching for
survival: The hazards of head coach
careers in the German ‘Bundesliga’. App
Econ. 2009;41(25):3303–3311
28. van Ours JC, Van Tuijl MA. In-season
head-coach dismissals and the
performance of professional football
teams. Econ Inq. 2016;54:591–604.
29. Lupo C, Tessitore A. How important is the
final outcome to interpret match analysis
data: The influence of scoring a goal, and
difference between close and balance
games in elite soccer: Comment on
Lago-Peñas and Gomez-Lopez (2014).
Percept Mot Skills. 2016;
122(1): 280–5.